Hello everyone,

I need a bit of advice. I am keen to upgrade my computer and am not exactly tech savvy (you can say that again!). Here's my situation in a nutshell:

I am a [graphic] artist, though I mostly use traditional means to create my art. My work is quite intricate, mainly b&w line work. Lately I've been using inkscape to make vector copies of these drawings (using the trace feature). I'm having a lot of fun doing this, though progress is slow. Computer can't handle all the nodes.

I'm looking to upgrade... My comp is 5 years old. I've already max'd the RAM, etc.

The ONLY thing I need this computer for is inkscape/adobe programs etc (ie I won't be using it for internet/gaming).

So what should I look for??? My budget is under $1000. One other thing: I only need a computer tower; already own a great monitor & other peripherals.

Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!

You seem to have fairly generic requirements. $1000 on just the main unit is already plenty of money.

The current trend in graphics software is to use the graphics card GPU to improve performance. Some graphics cards are better supported than others, but this may depend on the software you use (this doesn't mean that you need a top-of-range video card, just a better one than integrated graphics).

I remember reading somewhere that the most important thing for fast inkscape use is RAM.

My system has max 8gb. When I vector trace my drawings (they're large works) sometimes I'm left with hundreds of thousands of nodes (the tracing takes a long time). I would really like a fast system (zooming in and out is a slow process etc).

AFAIK Inkscape doesn't (yet) make direct use of the GPU, so I'd focus on a better CPU and more memory. If you go with integrated graphics, make sure there's a slot to add a graphics card in future in case Inkscape does start using it in future.

As for your traces, would it be possible to break them up into smaller sections? In other words, are there any clearly separate "parts" to them that could be treated separately?

For our 'Monsters, Inked' comics I often scan a scene with several characters or objects in, then trace them as one path. Node editing on that path can be very slow. Instead I duplicate the path as many times as I need to, then draw rectangles or ellipses over each object. By using the boolean operations (Path > Difference and its friends) you can then "cut" your original path into smaller pieces which are faster to manipulate. I've found that breaking up a trace using boolean operations is a _lot_ faster than trying to break it up by node editing.

Xav, I wonder about the new renderer expected in 0.49? Won't that use the graphics card? Or am I confused (very likely, lol!)

If 8 gb of RAM is not enough, I would definitely go very basic on the graphics card, and everything else, and as Xav suggested, focus on processor and RAM. I'm not familiar with new computer specs vs price, but if you can double the RAM....well, I'd just get as much as possible

less than a year ago i bought a replacement pc (without monitor) for the Mac challenged parts of the family, which conveniently stops my Mac becoming a repository for all sorts of junk sourced free on the net. Anyway, i was pleasantly surprised that the HP cost less than $900 and had decent specs, including 64 bit good speed intel cpu, 4gig ram, graphics card with good amount of ram, lots of hard disk space and windows 7 home premium; this is quite a departure for most pc sellers previously only selling underperforming setups at good prices. But especially so for this brand, which used to be all looks (case and keyboard design) and dreadful performance, when it came to consumer pcs.
better with a half decent graphics card than onboard one. onboard graphics cards are very slow, as they use main ram for screen buffer. this is regardless of inkscape being able to use a card directly or not. most programs for graphics design will get the benfit, and not to mention that the operating system itself (windows) will greatly benefit in performance.
i bought this pc on special from a major retailer, to avoid having return problems if anything was to go wrong.
i'm not a salesman for hp or get my knickers in a knot about any particular model or such however, as a starting point have a look at something like "HP Pavilion P6-2171A Desktop Tower"
[edit] you could also check out ex-publishing or ex-gaming second hand systems...but i like my systems these days without hardware hacks and/or illegal software. on the positive side, these are mostly over the top systems that cost the owner thousands of dollars to build, and they could only ever hope for a fraction of that when selling it.

brynn wrote:Xav, I wonder about the new renderer expected in 0.49? Won't that use the graphics card? Or am I confused (very likely, lol!)

I think the plan is for it to make more use of the GPU, but I'm not certain. That said, with no release date for 0.49 in sight I would stick to my usual advice to people, which is not to purchase a PC based on what you might need in a year's time, but rather on what you need today. $50 (or more!) spent on a graphics card now won't get you as powerful a card as $50 spent in a year, so if you don't need it now then you're better off getting it when you do need it.

That said, chriswww's comment about sharing the RAM is worth considering. I suspect that any machine bought today will seem sufficiently faster than a 5 year-old box that the slowness of integrated graphics won't be an immediate issue, so my personal choice would be to scrimp on the graphics for now, but be prepared to spend when 0.49 comes out.